>The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up the Centre for not complying with its directions, issued in July 2011, to disclose information received from Germany about Indian citizens who had stashed away their money in Liechtenstein Bank.
A Bench of Justices H.L. Dattu and Ranjana Desai and Madan Lokur told Solicitor-General Mohan Parasaran, “We take your statement that the names were not disclosed as the SIT could not be constituted with a pinch of salt. It is contempt of our directions.”
Justice Dattu told Mr. Parasaran that all directions in the July 4, 2011 judgment were inter-connected and disclosure of names received from Germany was to be done forthwith. “The judgment has to be read disjunctively and not conjunctively. We are not satisfied with the explanation of the SG.”
Mr. Parasaran brought to the notice of the court that Justice Jeevan Reddy, who was appointed as SIT chief, expressed his inability to take up the work, whereas Justice M.B. Shah had given his consent for being a SIT member. He said the question of disclosure would arise only after the SIT was constituted, and not before.
Refusing to accept his submission, Justice Dattu said: “The constitution of the SIT has nothing to do with implementation of our directions which are very clear. You have to give the documents and information received from Germany about the account holders in Liechtenstein Bank. Secondly, the investigation has to be taken over by the SIT.”
The Bench asked both Mr. Parasaran and senior counsel Anil Divan, appearing for petitioner Ram Jethmalani, to suggest the name of a judge who could be appointed as either SIT chief or member with Justice Shah being appointed as SIT chief. The Bench posted the matter for further hearing on April 29 when the SG would take instructions and inform the court if the information obtained from Germany could be disclosed or not.
